The first Duke of Cornwall was Edward of Woodstock, the Black Prince. As a matter of fact, he became first the Duke of Cornwall (1337) and then the Prince of Wales (1343).

Only the Sovereign's eldest son can hold the dukedom, according to the charter of 1421. If the eldest son of the Sovereign dies, his eldest son does not inherit the dukedom. However, if the eldest son should die without children, then his next brother obtains the dukedom.

Underlying these rules is the principle that only a son of the Sovereign—never a daughter of a grandson—may be Duke of Cornwall. Thus, it is possible for an individual to be Prince of Wales without being Duke of Cornwall.

I do not know for sure who is entitled to the income from the Duchy when there is no Duke of Cornwall, but I think it is the British Sovereign, the dukedom having been reverted to the Crown.

I forget the thread now, but we were talking about the situation with Princess Elizabeth and where her income came from since she wasn't able to use the Duchy money after she turned 18 and before she became Queen. I'm pretty sure that the money reverted to the government or something in the absence of a Duke, so the money Princess Elizabeth received from the Civil List was wasn't given to her while her father was stashing the Duchy funds too.

I was wondering about the Duchy of Cornwall, and have a few questions:

Since when in history did the Prince of Wales become the Duke of Corwall?

The Prince of Wales doesn't become the Duke of Cornwall.

The Duke of Cornwall title is an inherited title while the Prince of Wales title is a created one.

In 1952 when George VI died Charles instantly became Duke of Cornwall but he wasn't created Prince of Wales until 1958 (his investiture was in 1969).

In 1841 Prince Albert Edward was born Duke of Cornwall but created Prince of Wales shortly afterwards.

In 1901 George V was Duke of Cornwall and York from the death of Queen Victoria in January until the November of that year when his father created him Prince of Wales (he opened the first ever Australian parliament in 1901 with the titles of Duke of Cornwall and York).

George V didn't wait very long after his accession to create his son Prince of Wales.

The instant Charles becomes king William will be Duke of Cornwall and it will be up to Charles as to when, or even if, he creates William Prince of Wales. He could do it at any time after his accession. Prince of Wales is not an automatic title unlike Duke of Cornwall.

I forget the thread now, but we were talking about the situation with Princess Elizabeth and where her income came from since she wasn't able to use the Duchy money after she turned 18 and before she became Queen. I'm pretty sure that the money reverted to the government or something in the absence of a Duke, so the money Princess Elizabeth received from the Civil List was wasn't given to her while her father was stashing the Duchy funds too.

I remember reading this at the time. My thought was that if the income from the Duchy reverted to the government, how could the trustees of the Duchy carry out their functions without an income? ie, reinvesting, rebuilding, buying land, maintenance, upkeep etc. Or does the Duchy in the circumstance where there is no Duke of Cornwall just spend/reinvest all cash flow so there is no profit to be remitted to the government? Or even better, stash the cash in 'contingency reserves' accounts?

Well, maybe what happens is that the part of the income that would go to support the Duke was returned to the government or something.

Otherwise you'd have had a situation where, after turning 18, Princess Elizabeth would have had to be given money from the Civil List while the Duchy was hanging onto all the Duchy proceeds, during a period when the country was desperately short of money. That would have been an unacceptably selfish thing for the King to do, and even with the greater deference shown to the monarchy back then, it's unlikely that it would have gone unnoticed. For all anyone knew back in 1944, Princess Elizabeth was going to stay a princess for the next quarter century.

The Government agreed part of the duchy's income could be used to support Princess Elizabeth's Household, even though she could succeed to the Dukedom of Cornwall. It is specifically reserved for the eldest son of the Sovereign who is also the heir to the throne.

The heir is always created Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester, so it is possible, for instance, that Charles could predecease his mother and the Queen would then create William the new Prince of Wales. But the Dukedom of Cornwall would revert back to the Crown since William is not the eldest son of the Sovereign and Andrew would not be the heir to the throne as the new eldest son.

I didn't realise a grandson could be created Prince of Wales. I know George V was created Prince of Wales after his father became King, but by then he was the eldest son, his elder brother having died years earlier.

Was George III created Prince of Wales before he became King? He was the last monarch to succeed a grandparent, if memory serves.

Yes, George III was created Prince of Wales when his father, Frederick, Prince of Wales, died in March 1751. At the age of 12, George automatically became the Duke of Edinburgh and was created Prince of Wales by his grandfather, George II, in April 1751.

I remember reading this at the time. My thought was that if the income from the Duchy reverted to the government, how could the trustees of the Duchy carry out their functions without an income? ie, reinvesting, rebuilding, buying land, maintenance, upkeep etc. Or does the Duchy in the circumstance where there is no Duke of Cornwall just spend/reinvest all cash flow so there is no profit to be remitted to the government? Or even better, stash the cash in 'contingency reserves' accounts?

I think that the profit, after reinvesting, repairs etc is taken by the government. The company returns/company taxes/corporation tax scrutiny would ensure that the profits were not 'diverted'!

That is a very impressive article. I had read that Poundbury initially attracted enormous criticism and the Prince's folly. But within in the past 12 months I've seen more and more that praises it's successes. It is good to see the Prince getting the praise he deserves for some of his efforts such as Poundbury, the environment, his organic farming. I think he is basically a very good man....peevish though he may be about some things.

Thanks for the article, AgnesK. :)
I am really glad the Prince of Wales gets the praise he deserves.
I love the words 'the Prince, who cares', That's what I think of His Royal Highness, that he cares. And that's something to come across very rarely.

__________________Queen Elizabeth: "I cannot lead you into battle, I do not give you laws or administer justice but I can do something else, I can give you my heart and my devotion to these old islands and to all the peoples of our brotherhood of nations." God, Save The Queen!

If the Duke of Cornwall dies, and has no issue, does his younger brother become the Duke of corwall. or is it reverted to the crown untill the next oppurtunity arises? What if the next in line is a nephew/cousin to the king?!
Did George V become Duke of cornwall when his father became the king? Even though he wasn't the oldest son?